David Cournapeau wrote:
> Christopher Barker wrote:
>> Though I'm a bit surprised that that's not how the print function is
>> written in the first place (maybe it is in py3k -- I'm testing on 2.5)
>>>> That's actually how it works as far as I can tell. The thing with
> removing those print is that we can do it without too much trouble. As
> long as we cannot actually test any py3k code, warnings from python 2.6
> is all we can get.
>> I think we should aim at getting "something" which builds and runs (even
> if does not go further than import stage), so we can gradually port. For
> now, porting py3k is this huge thing that nobody can work on for say one
> hour. I would like to make sure we get at that stage, so that many
> people can take part of it, instead of the currently quite few people
> who are deeply intimate with numpy.
One thing somebody *could* work on rather independently for some hours
is proper PEP 3118 support, as that is available in Python 2.6+ as well
and could be conditionally used on those systems.
Cython already contains the start of an implementation of this on
NumPy's behalf (though it would need to be improved as one does no
longer know the characteristics of the client but must implement the
whole API).
I think it would be better if I spend my time on Cython, but I'm willing
to mentor anybody who'd like to do this in NumPy as I've worked a lot
with PEP 3118. (OTOH Travis wrote that PEP :-) ).
--
Dag Sverre